> I am not sure that's really correct: while Git is internally pretty powerful, it's by no means incredibly powerful. Good thing neither "pretty powerful" nor

> I am not sure that's really correct: while Git is internally pretty powerful, it's by no means incredibly powerful. Good thing neither "pretty powerful" nor "incredibly powerful" have formal definitions ;) > Also, internals do drive what UX you can have Yes, but that's not what I'm talking about. Git just has bad UX. There's no reason why creating a branch can't be part of `git branch` rather than `git checkout`, but that was an opinionated decision that every user just has to deal with now. Or, why does `git stash pop` immediately stage changes if there's a conflict, but not otherwise? Yes, there's always a reason behind these choices, but they prioritize some concept of "purity" over UX. The result is a tool that has spawned a thousand "learn git" tutorials because it's so user-hostile.